• 581 members

About us

February 2017 - Jennifer Zinck joined the project as Co-Admin

Nov 2016 -Dave Strong resigns as Admin

May 2015 - Bobbie Jean Hooser joined the Admin team

May 2015 - Traynors leave the project as it is evident they don't share Armstrong ancestry

May 2015  John D Armstrong resigns as Admin

April 2015 - Bob Armstrong became project Admin

March 2011 - Haplogroup assignments updated by FTNA, effectively changing R1b1b2 to R1b1a2. Where the Haplogroup is shown in Green, it indicates that FTDNA has SNP Tested the participant.   Administrators have attempted to group all participants with similar STR results with members who have both the same STR's and  have a known haplogroup as shown by recent SNP testing.  For those groups which are only "R1b1a2", or for individuals who are not yet assigned to a group, it would be most helpful if members ordered Deep Clade or Universal Deep Clade SNP testing from FTDNA.   Such additional information may assist the administrators in making appropriate matches.

For further information concerning Haplogroup assignments, see the ISSOG website, and particularly the "Notice" posted at:

September 2009 - The project has 119 participants.

October 2008 - the project logged 101 participants.

September 2008 - Terry Walker joined the project as a Co-Admin

08 November 2007 - Bob Armstrong of Bournemouth, England joined the project as a Co-Admin

05 June 2005 the project was expanded to include the TRAYNOR surname (and all variations)

05 Jan 2005 _ John D. Armstrong became Project Administrator.

21 Dec 2004 - the ARMSTRONG project was annouced at GenForum.

12 Dec 2004 - the first member joined the separate Armstrong Surname Project.

10 Aug 2004 - the separate ARMSTRONG Surname Project was opened.

April 2004 - The Border Reivers DNA Project was commenced, including Armstrong members.

7 April 2003 - The first Armstrongs joined the Strong FTDNA surname project.

circa 2002 - The first Armstrong DNA testing was performed.

4 January 2015:  During 2014, FTDNA posted ESTIMATED Haplogroupings [using a red font] for virtually all participants who had not previously engaged in SNP testing.  These FTDNA estimates are NOT CONFIRMED by SNP testing, and are subject to change or correction upon proper SNP testing.  The FTDNA postings did, however, lead to a major effort to assign the various participants to their proper Haplogroup and subclade.   The reason for this is that while there may be an apparent match of two or more kits based on their respective STR results there is no way they can have a common ancestor in a genealogically significant timeframe.   In other words, a participant with a “R” SNP cannot have a common ancestor with a participant with an E, I, J, etc., SNP resu  Further, differing subclades within a particular Haplogroup can effectively rule out a close Common Ancestor.  Quite obviously, SNP testing provides a very useful cross-reference in comparing matches of STR results.   It is desirable to avoid mis-matches which might otherwise result from apparent STR matches of kits which are from different Haplogroups and/or subclades.

At the end of December 2014, FTDNA further undertook a major Haplotree update, which at the present is still underway.  According toFTDNA, “There were major refinements and additions in Haplogroups  R, N, I, and O with numerous smaller changes elsewhere.”   Each FTDNA Participant can access FTDNA’s version of the Haplotree using the link provided  on their respective Kit pages.    There remain differences between FTDNA’s Haplotree and the Haplotree developed by ISSOG, the International Society of Genetic Genealogy.  Additionally, Ray Banks is in the process of developing an “”.  This latter tree has various sources, but largely mirrors the ISSOG Haplotree.

In the present project, FTDNA assigns each kit a Haplogroup designation on the “SNP Results” page using the FTDNA version of the Haplotree.   Participants will notice that the project administrators have grouped the various kits into subclades using the ISSOG Haplotree.   This is not to say that the ISSOG Haplotree is necessarily  better than the FTDNA Haplotree; however, using the ISSOG Haplotree for the grouping  does provide “food for thought” and gives participants some idea of the direction new research is proceeding.    Additionally, reference to  the specific ISSOG Haplogroup page for respective haplogroup assignments  provides some very interesting and useful  links to  research sources and data.   One can click on the link to, for example, the “R” page found at the ISSOG Haplotree Main Page and proceed to explore present information concerning the Tree and SNPs underlying the various assignments. Additionally, there are links to various webpages and other FTDNA projects actively engaged in researching and collecting data relative to the various sub-haplogroups or subclades.

Much additional information can be developed.  For Example, Chris Morley, info’at’  has identified a Northwest England Y-DNAcluster within the SNP:  L448 subclade ofhaplogroup R1a. The cluster is characterized by the uncommon marker valuesYCAII = 21-21, DYS464 = 12-15-15-17 and DYS534 = 12. See  for further information, including a map of cluster members' supposed ancestral origins, a spreadsheet of haplotypes and a diagram of cluster subdivisions.

The Ray Banks “”provides an interesting additional component for researchers.  Theknown predominant composition of terminal branches is shown on the rightside of each Haplogroup subclade. See for example the “E1a & E2” tree at:  One can estimate whether the kitparticipant has “Mandenka” or “Yoruba” ancestry, etc. , thus providing an additional clue as to further avenues of research.  And so on. Many, but not all, of the Banks Haplogroup subclades appear to have ancestral estimates where known.   Further developments, including addition of  an “R”page,  will be interesting to all concerned.

As indicated in the opening paragraph, SNP testing provides a very useful cross-reference in comparing matches of STR results.  Experience shows that the best STR matches arefound where the tested SNPs indicates the kits belong to the same subclades.  All  participants are urged to try to identify the“terminal SNP”  for the haplogroup  subclade to which they are tentatively assigned.  Please note that many of the “green font” SNP results shown for those who tested in the past [particularly in the “R”Tree including P25 and M269] are functionally out of date and need to be updated with more realistic terminal SNPs. Presently, FTDNA offers SNP testing of individual SNPs for $39.00 each, a relatively inexpensive cost compared to the potential usefulness of updated results.